U.S. v. PONCE-ALDONA, 2009 WL 2450282 (11th Cir. August 12, 2009)
The defendant conditionally pled guilty to drug charges but on appeal argued that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress because the initial stop did not fall under the administrative search exception to the warrant requirement under the Fourth Amendment. The appellate court examined the district court’s denial of the motion to suppress and found that the Georgia statute’s regulatory scheme as a whole, including the incorporated federal regulations, satisfied the third prong of the Burger test) for compatibility with the Fourth Amendment (The defendant did not raise any challenges to the first or second prong). The Georgia statue provided notice to owners that their vehicles would be searched on a regular basis, and that the time, place, and scope of the inspections placed proper restraints upon the inspecting officer’s discretion.
Posts Tagged ‘warrant’
State’s regulation for safety inspections of commercial motor vehicles was adequate substitute for warrant under Fourth Amendment.
Wednesday, October 21st, 2009